Because Muslims must condemn terror

“Second, heaping an expectation on Muslims – to call out “their” criminals – is absurd when no similar expectation is placed on any other religious, ethnic, or ideological group. Is it appropriate for a white man to tell “the hispanics” to make proclamations against the drug trade? Why should a hispanic who has never even touched drugs speak out against drug lords? His abstention from engaging in the drug trade is condemnation enough. The same goes for Muslims and terrorism. If you want a Muslim to condemn terrorism, realize that he has done so by not engaging in it. Life becomes quite insufferable for Muslims if before speaking about any subject a Muslim is required to first “demonstrate” that he is not “on the side of the enemy.”

interesting. no, make that refreshing. made me think about how defensive i’ve become since 9/11. mr eteraz says he didn’t share his works between 2001 and 2006. me, i watch what i say because i don’t want to read my words on an indictment some day….taken out of context of course….but still the lawyer in me is always on guard. and it sucks.

its important because it reminds us not to speak that language when talking about islam. islam is not “anti-terrorist”: islam is peaceful. why couch it in the terms they use? we should trust in our faith’s inherent beauty. that’s what changes people’s minds about it, not how vigorously you defend it.